HomeGroupsTalkZeitgeist
This site uses cookies to deliver our services, improve performance, for analytics, and (if not signed in) for advertising. By using LibraryThing you acknowledge that you have read and understand our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. Your use of the site and services is subject to these policies and terms.
Hide this

Results from Google Books

Click on a thumbnail to go to Google Books.

The Darkening Age: The Christian Destruction…
Loading...

The Darkening Age: The Christian Destruction of the Classical World (original 2017; edition 2018)

by Catherine Nixey (Author)

MembersReviewsPopularityAverage ratingMentions
1424119,294 (3.92)4
Member:GregsBookCell
Title:The Darkening Age: The Christian Destruction of the Classical World
Authors:Catherine Nixey (Author)
Info:Houghton Mifflin Harcourt (2018)
Collections:Your library, Currently reading
Rating:
Tags:None

Work details

The Darkening Age: The Christian Destruction of the Classical World by Catherine Nixey (2017)

Loading...

Sign up for LibraryThing to find out whether you'll like this book.

No current Talk conversations about this book.

» See also 4 mentions

Showing 4 of 4
History is written by the victors. It stands to reason, then, that the history of Christianity's rise in power is also written and handed down to us by its victors. Historians, particularly in ancient times, wanted to, or perhaps were required to, put a positive spin on events. And so the history we're taught, whether in school or in church, is typically edited and shown in a pretty light. With this book, we take off those rose-colored glasses and examine the whole truth surrounding Christianity's rise.

Catherine Nixey's writing style is more narrative nonfiction than textbook or scholarly work. The writing is reader-friendly, taking us back through a broad time period and allowing us to experience a bit of it for ourselves.

The layout is not linear. We don't start out at one year and work our way forward through all the minutiae. Nixey takes a more topical approach here. We look at philosophers and Christian martyr's and political leaders, following them along and seeing how and why they made certain choices. We look at the overall culture, as well as the negative effects and fallout of Christianity's rise.

This is not at all a Christian-bashing book. It's not written solely for atheists, any more than a book on the Civil War is written solely for northerners. Nixey does not attack belief in God or any other Christian beliefs. With this book, Nixey seeks only to provide an honest and complete picture of the tumultuous world of early Christianity.

*The publisher provided me with a review copy, via Amazon Vine, in exchange for my honest review.* ( )
1 vote Darcia | Jul 8, 2018 |
I've just finished reading Catherine Nixey's excellent and thought-provoking book, and given that there's pretty much an even split in the two reviews that now exist, I thought I would put my thumb on the scales...

Nixey, educated at Cambridge, studied the classics and went on to teach the subject before moving sideways into journalism, which means she brings to her project a scholarly knowledge of one side of the equation: the classical world's perception of the rise to power/triumph of Christianity. Raised by a former monk and a former nun, as a Catholic, she also learned to accept as "givens" what remains the standard narrative about that subject, from the idea that Christians were relentlessly and consistently persecuted for their religion to the concept that the world somehow became a happier place starting with the conversion of Constantine.

It's important to note that Nixey's goal is NOT to provide a "balanced" narrative. She herself points out that the church and scholars drawing on centuries of history that has been unevenly preserved and then tilted in favor of the victors (any student of history knows that this happens, and it's no less the case in a religious triumph than in a political one...) means that there have been plenty of books that document the Christian view of the crucial centuries from about 200 AD, when Christians became significantly more visible, to 592 AD, when Justinian finally decreed that anyone who didn't convert to Christianity would have their goods seized, be exiled, as well as suffer vague "other" punishments. So she has started from the other perspective: what would it have been like to be among the 90% of the population of greater Europe (the Roman/Byzantine empire) that historians estimate was NOT Christian at the time of Constantine's conversion? What would their experience of the ensuing decades and centuries have been like?

Her answer? Chaos, fear and uncertainty. Once Christians decided that their faith could not (unlike all the others that existed in the world) coexist, but that it was THE path to truth and not A path to truth, and that everyone must subscribe to it, all bets were off. (And she quotes liberally from early church theologians and apologists, ranging from Augustine to Tertullian, in support of that broad position.) Monks weren't just holy men praying in the desert, but roving bands of enforcers, tearing down and mutilating statues, burning books indiscriminately (usually) and assaulting or even murdering anyone who stood in their path. Nixey recounts one magistrate who, hearing the chanting mob approaching his courtroom, simply jumped up and fled, saying "justice cannot be exercised once they have appeared." And while of course Nixey chronicles the murder of Hypatia in Alexandria (as one of the best known thinkers in centuries...), she notes Hypatia wasn't alone. Mobs in North Africa (Carthage) beat those who weren't sufficiently devout (including Christians...) to death with clubs, since Matthew 26:22 told them to keep their swords sheathed. (So somehow, clubbing to death became acceptable...)

Individual incidents from this book may be familiar to readers of history, from Hypatia's death to the final collapse of the Library of Alexandria, and Gibbon's analysis of the role of Christianity in his 18th century "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire". Indeed, if you've read that, this would be an excellent book to follow up with, as, like Gibbon, Nixey relies heavily on primary sources, and analyzes and discusses the motivations of each of those sources. Was the person whose perspective she is citing likely to have been threatened by what was happening, or was he speaking from the perspective of the winning camp and yet being presented in ostensibly objective prose even centuries later as a benign individual? (A case in point is France's St. Martin, who was was famed throughout what would become France for the violence with which he approached destroying art, buildings and his hostility to individuals of other faiths -- a Penguin book of the Lives of the Saints refers to him blandly as sometimes "over-zealous."

To me, this is a book about how to approach history as much as it is history itself. In any tug-of-war, there are always two sides to a story. One has been the dominant narrative; the other has been lost. (Nixey quotes -- accurately -- the estimate that today we possess perhaps 1% of all the Latin literature ever written, and that most contemporary critics of Christianity had their words banned outright, with anyone possessing copies being automatically condemned to death. So we possess only glimpses here and there into this tale. Still, Nixey has crafted a narrative that suggests what it might have been like to be part of a majority in a large empire -- a polytheistic, multilingual, multicultural, chaotic kind of universe, in which Christians made up only 10% -- and then one day to wake up and find that that 10% now ran the world and set the rules, and that in contrast to the olden days, when merely pretending to sacrifice (she debunks some of the Christian martyr stories, too) by touching incense once every decade, would have gotten you off the hook, the new regime wants to own your soul because it is the truth. WHAT a shock to the system. Nixey's challenge to the reader is to ask us to imagine that kind of transition, and what being compelled to believe in someone else's religion, or else, might have been like. She does compare the nature of the persecutions of Christians (and anyone else who didn't want to submit to the authority of a divine emperor at periodic intervals) in three distinct periods, with the nature of the persecution of non-Christians under the rule of bishops who gave their followers carte blanche to walk into neighbors' houses whenever they wanted to look for books or statues.

This made me think of what's happening in Europe today, and specifically the fear of a "takeover" by Muslims who will impose sharia law on all Europeans. The percentage of Muslims, in Western Europe, is roughly analogous to Christians at the time of Constantine's conversion... No, Nixey doesn't go there, but that's what I mean about this being thought provoking.

So much of what was written by those who weren't church leaders, like Augustine, simply wasn't preserved (or was destroyed) that we may never have a full or complete picture of the people who weren't part of the group we today see as the mainstream -- the ultimate victors. And time has eroded the memory of their extreme and intolerant views, characteristic of many religions seeking to establish themselves or that feel under threat. In other cases, Nixey's description of early monastic practices can be linked to current monastic practices, like the denial of personal property (and the concept of bringing a "dowry" to the church, in the case of nuns), or the extremes of self-abnegation and self-punishment, such as hair shirts and "the discipline".

This is no more a balanced view than Thomas Cahill's book about how the Irish saved civilization by saving books, or many others I could mention, that take a perspective and support it with research. That said, it DOES provide a solid, well-researched and analytical historical look at a turning point from the 4th to the 6th centuries. It's not written by a religious believer like Karen Armstrong, which is fine -- precisely because it's not a work of theology, but about the impact that those theologians had on the people they viewed as existing in "insane error". It's not polemical. It says nothing about today's Catholic church, or Christianity today; it says nothing about the merits or lack thereof of the religion. It only addresses how those who were NOT Christian and did NOT convert or feel moved to embrace that faith, experienced their encounters with Christianity as the religion became the power in their world, from THEIR point of view and not those of the victors. For those who are religious, try not to read too much into this. Nixey is chronicling history, not mocking. She is recounting what people at that time, 1,700 years ago, might have experienced or did experience, based on the record that has come down to us. No more, no less. And the fact that it might come as a shock to some is, itself, testimony that this kind of book -- written not by someone with a religious axe to grind but by someone with an academic background even if she isn't an academic today -- has a role. Read it and think about what messages it sends about the nature of belief, about tolerance, about how we arrive at faith and how we treat others if they don't share our view of THE only faith. Nixey does mention how one of the early targets of the iconoclasts, or image breakers, were the classical temples in Palmyra in Syria (which I was lucky enough to visit before the war erupted there...) And of course, precisely the same statues, since carefully restored, have since been destroyed and defaced by ISIS. Intolerance and a demand that everyone think alike is not the preserve of any single religion, but of zealots of all faiths. But in a world where parchment and papyrus and fragile sculptures were all that preserved an entire classical civilization, we may never know the price of this particular kind of zealotry that Nixey describes. ( )
3 vote Chatterbox | Jun 25, 2018 |
At the end of the Introduction, Catherine Nixey says the following:

One final note: many, many good people are impelled by their Christian faith to do many, many good things. I know because I am an almost daily beneficiary of such goodness myself. This book is not intended as an attack on these people and I hope they will not see it as such. But it is undeniable that there have been — that there still are — those who use monotheism and its weapons to terrible ends. Christianity is a greater and a stronger religion when it admits this — and challenges it.

After finishing this book (and waiting a couple of weeks to write my review) I think that statement must have been forced upon her by her agent or the publisher. It’s hard to see this book as anything but an attack on Christianity. Not that she doesn’t have a point: the persecutions of non-Christians after Christianity was adopted by Rome was shameful, and I agree that it lead to what we refer to as “the Dark Ages.” However, the author’s attempts to appear balanced fall flat.

Nixey is a journalist rather than a historian, but she covers the period of roughly 300AD to 500AD quite well and in a readable manner. The narrative leans toward sensationalism and is frequently repetitive, but for the most part it works. Also, it doesn’t follow a chronological timetable, but the chapters focus on various aspects of Christianity, such as martyrs, monks, destruction of pagan temples or texts, or unique beliefs. And in spite of a rather salacious description about murders of pagans, there’s actually very little of that in the text. Instead, Nixey seems to take personal offense at the destruction of statues and art, which were seen as idols by early Christians. The worst she says, however, was the neglect of pagan writings, which in a time when texts were often erased to reuse the paper for something else was an understandable action. (Nonetheless, Nixey is right that much was lost, and Western Civilization was set back because of it.)

I appreciated that Nixey includes much information about the Greeks and Romans that I hadn't seen elsewhere. And while that information is frequently very unflattering, it’s also presented in an entirely benign manner. And yet her portrayals of similarly unflattering aspects of Christianity are shown in the worst light. One section that particularly bothered me was about the writings of Celsus, a Greek intellectual around 170AD. Apparently, the only record we have of his writings is through a rebuttal written by a Christian writer about 80 years later, yet Nixey spends over a dozen pages telling us of Celsus’ witty criticisms of Christianity, many of which show a rather poor knowledge of the subject on his part. She says “It is clear that... Celsus knows a lot about [Christianity]. He has read Christian scripture - and not just read it: studied it in great detail. He knows about everything... It is equally clear that he loathes it all...” And yet Celsus claims the Resurrection was only seen by “a hysterical female” and one other in contradiction to what the New Testament actually says, to give just one example.

At any rate, the book was rather interesting but not balanced in the least. Nixey takes great joy in putting down the Christian church and mocking its beliefs and customs. She is correct in saying that Christians should be stronger for facing the actual history, but her attacks go far beyond that. And I’m not sure how monotheism is any more to blame for historically unjust actions than polytheism. An alternate book I would recommend is [b:Fields of Blood: Religion and the History of Violence|20758028|Fields of Blood Religion and the History of Violence|Karen Armstrong|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1414346683s/20758028.jpg|40090508]. (A personal note: in all fairness I want to acknowledge that I am a Christian, although not a Catholic. In fact, my church believes there was an “apostasy” or falling away from the truth [2 Thessalonians 2:3 among other references] and that the Christian Church had ceased to resemble anything Christ had established within a hundred years of Christ’s death and needed to be restored. Nonetheless, I felt awful for my Catholic friends as I read this attack on the early days of their church.) ( )
  J.Green | Apr 17, 2018 |
"With our faith, we desire no further belief"

Before Christianity, no one identified by their religion, says Catherine Nixey. It was not their defining characteristic. Christians imposed their beliefs on everyone else, and required everyone to identify as Christian. That is the essence of The Darkening Age. It shows how the free-for-all that was life in the Roman Empire became the dour, sullen austerity of Christendom.

The Roman Empire was about living life to the fullest. Sex was celebrated (March 17 was a national festival celebrating young men’s first ejaculations), the bathhouses were for both sexes, sex acts provided artwork on walls, floors and objects in homes. Shame was not in the culture. Fine food and wine were exalted. Every religion from the vast expanse of the Empire was tolerated. The attitude was: Believe what you will, I’m having a drink. It was actually very Christian of them.

Nixey’s argument is that right from the beginning, Christianity favored martyrs over do-gooders to promote itself. Stories became epics, the ordinary became tragic and blood became holy, as Christianity’s fame and (forced) attraction spread. Christians were all about suicide and martyrdom, because eternal life after death was the promise and the goal. Christianity’s intolerance also began early on, denigrating any other form of worship, and once in power, punishing it by death to adherents. Homosexuality and lesbianism were banned, slavery was upheld, and death sentences became routine.

It all began with Constantine’s conversion in 312. He exempted the church from taxes, paid bishops five times the rate for professors, and set about converting his entire Roman Empire. To do this, he literally demonized all other religions, claiming all of them were really demons among the good people of the empire. By 386 it was a capital crime to even criticize Christianity. Up to that point, Christianity had been considered an eastern cult with absurd myths at its center.

The Darkening Age follows the collapse of civilization (the Roman Empire) from the time of Jesus to about 500 AD. In that time, the Romans went from tolerating Christians and their fierce sect (Pliny called it a “degenerate sort of cult”), to being taken over by it. The empire went from multi-faith to one single faith, as Christians, far from loving their neighbors, destroyed all vestiges of previous civilization, including the largest repository of knowledge and history – the library at Alexandria – and forced their religion on one and all, or face execution. They implemented spying by neighbors, required bishops to monitor each other for their faith, and instituted gruesome torture and murder for anyone suspected of lack of enthusiasm for Christianity.

Throughout the book there is a heartbreaking refugee, a philosopher named Damascius. He fled Alexandria because philosophy was destroyed by Christianity. He made it to Athens, where he resurrected the Academy of ancient Greece, and it thrived once again -until the Christians took over. He fled again, this time to Persia, which was so vulgar and ignorant, he and his last seven philosophers fled back to the Roman Empire, where they faded from history.

Christians were proud of their ignorance and despised learning. They dragged the most honored mathematician in the world to a temple, stripped her and flayed her skin off with pottery shards. They managed to burn books to the point where entire centuries show no evidence of non-religious writing at all. Monks scraped parchments clean and made copies of the bible on them instead. Statues were defaced, temples destroyed and the stones used to make churches. Nixey’s research says 90% of ancient Greek and Roman artifacts were mutilated or destroyed by Christians. They hammered nipples, carved crosses in foreheads, and smashed limbs. Essentially, any and every evidence of past learning or religion was removed from the Roman Empire as 60 million were cowed into allowing it to go on.

Reading The Darkening Age is very familiar. It is exactly what Islam is going through today. Killing apostates, blowing up statuary, destroying museums, demonizing sex and regulating every movement of every resident. The fierceness and intolerance of the Islamic fundamentalists has all been seen before. Only the numbers are different, as 21st century man counts in the billions, and the entire world is Islam’s target. There are many lessons in The Darkening Age, but mostly it is a fiendishly uncomfortable and gripping read.

David Wineberg ( )
3 vote DavidWineberg | Mar 6, 2018 |
Showing 4 of 4
no reviews | add a review
You must log in to edit Common Knowledge data.
For more help see the Common Knowledge help page.
Series (with order)
Canonical title
Original title
Alternative titles
Original publication date
People/Characters
Important places
Important events
Related movies
Awards and honors
Epigraph
Dedication
“To T.,
for deciphering my handwriting.”
First words
Quotations
Last words
Disambiguation notice
Publisher's editors
Blurbers
Publisher series
Original language
Canonical DDC/MDS

References to this work on external resources.

Wikipedia in English

None

Book description
Despite the long-held notion that the early Christians were meek and mild, going to their martyr's deaths singing hymns of love and praise, the truth, as Catherine Nixey reveals, is very different. Far from being meek and mild, they were violent, ruthless and fundamentally intolerant. Unlike the polytheistic world, in which the addition of one new religion made no fundamental difference to the old ones, this new ideology stated not only that it was the way, the truth and the light but that, by extension, every single other way was wrong and had to be destroyed. From the 1st century to the 6th, those who didn't fall into step with its beliefs were pursued in every possible way: social, legal, financial and physical. Their altars were upturned and their temples demolished, their statues hacked to pieces and their priests killed. It was an annihilation. Authoritative, vividly written and utterly compelling, this is a remarkable debut from a brilliant young historian.
Haiku summary

No descriptions found.

"A bold new history of the rise of Christianity, showing how its radical followers ravaged vast swathes of classical culture, plunging the world into an era of intellectual darkness. In Harran, the locals refused to convert. They were dismembered, their limbs hung along the town's main street. In Alexandria, zealots pulled the elderly philosopher-mathematician Hypatia from her chariot and flayed her to death with shards of broken pottery. Not long before, their fellow Christians had invaded the city's greatest temple and razed it--smashing its world-famous statues and destroying all that was left of Alexandria's Great Library. Today, we refer to Christianity's conquest of the West as a triumph. But this victory entailed an orgy of destruction in which Jesus's followers attacked and suppressed classical culture, helping to pitch Western civilization into a thousand-year-long decline. Just one percent of Latin literature would survive the purge; countless antiquities, artworks, and ancient traditions were lost forever. As Catherine Nixey reveals, evidence of early Christians' campaigns of terror has been hiding in plain sight: in the palimpsests and shattered statues proudly displayed in churches and museums the world over. In The Darkening Age, Nixey resurrects this lost history, offering a wrenching account of the rise of Christianity and its terrible cost."--Jacket.… (more)

(summary from another edition)

Quick Links

Popular covers

Rating

Average: (3.92)
0.5
1
1.5
2 2
2.5
3 3
3.5 2
4 4
4.5 1
5 6

Is this you?

Become a LibraryThing Author.

 

About | Contact | Privacy/Terms | Help/FAQs | Blog | Store | APIs | TinyCat | Legacy Libraries | Early Reviewers | Common Knowledge | 127,985,385 books! | Top bar: Always visible